In re Daniel C. 11/4/11 CA5

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: F060916

Case Date: 02/01/2012

Preview:Filed 11/4/11 In re Daniel C. CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
In re DANIEL C., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. F060916 (Super. Ct. No. JJD060401)

OPINION
DANIEL C., Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Valeriano Saucedo, Judge. Robert McLaughlin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Chatman and A. Kay Lauterbach, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

Following a contested hearing, Daniel C. (appellant) was committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ)1 for a maximum confinement time of nine years five months. On appeal, he contends the juvenile court both violated its authority and abused its discretion in committing him to the DJJ. He also contends that the juvenile court abused its discretion in setting his term of confinement. We disagree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On December 27, 2005, appellants mother called the police because appellant struck her while she was holding her three-year-old daughter. Appellants mother told the officer that appellant had been violent with family members before, that he had been making threats of violence towards them, and that she could no longer control him. In a subsequent interview, appellant said he was upset with his mother over a sexual relationship she was having with one of his friends. He acknowledged pushing her aside, but he did not recall her holding his sister at the time as he had "blacked out." A juvenile wardship petition filed in response to the incident alleged that appellant, who was then 14 years old, came within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court for committing a misdemeanor battery against his mother. (Welf. & Inst. Code,

Download In re Daniel C. 11/4/11 CA5.pdf